Jupiter Investment Management Group Limited v Stompolski [2010] DRS 8253 (18 May 2010)

Jupiter Investment Management Group Limited v Stompolski [2010] DRS 8253 (18 May 2010)

The complainant established rights in the JUPITER name and marks, which pre-date the respondent's registrations. The domain names were found to be similar to the complainant's marks and were used to create a false association, resulting in confusion and harm. The respondent, as registrant, is responsible for the abusive use of the domain names, regardless of claimed ignorance. The domain names are abusive registrations and should be transferred to the complainant.

Citation
[2010] DRS 8253
Parties
Complainant: Jupiter Investment Management Group Limited; Respondent: Karl Stompolski
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
18 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination
Outcome
Domain names transferred to complainant
Legal Topics
Domain Name Disputes, Trade Mark Infringement, Passing Off, Abusive Registration
Intellectual Property Information Technology Domain Name Disputes Trade Mark Infringement Passing Off Abusive Registration

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jupiter Investment Management Group Limited

Complainant

Karl Stompolski

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant has rights in a name or mark similar to the disputed domain names
  2. 2 Whether the domain names in the hands of the respondent are abusive registrations

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant established rights in the JUPITER name and marks, which pre-date the respondent's registrations. The domain names were found to be similar to the complainant's marks and were used to create a false association, resulting in confusion and harm. The respondent, as registrant, is responsible for the abusive use of the domain names, regardless of claimed ignorance. The domain names are abusive registrations and should be transferred to the complainant.

Court Disposition

Domain names transferred to complainant

Orders

  • The domain names <jupitermg.co.uk>, <jwmg.co.uk>, <jwmgroup.co.uk>, and <jfmgroup.co.uk> are to be transferred to the complainant.